Jump to content
The Official Site of the Montréal Canadiens
Canadiens de Montreal

The Ref Watch Squad


ZetPaul

Recommended Posts

I’ve been thinking about a thread like this for a while.

Nothing bothers me more during a hockey game than a bad call from a referee.

Not just any missed little hooking or meaningless stuff,

but decision-making, game-altering, result-forcing bad calls...

I figured I’d put up this thread in advance so that I (and you)

will have a place to vent when these bad calls occur.

I invite you to consult the officials’ webpage here.

There are interesting statistics found at nhl fanhouse...

Power Play vs. Shorthanded Comparison

Team / Power Play / Shorthanded / Dif.

Carolina Hurricanes / 344 / 288 / +64

San Jose Sharks / 325 / 281 / +44

Phoenix Coyotes / 308 / 265 / +43

Dallas Stars / 327 / 295 / +32

Minnesota Wild / 297 / 267 / +30

Chicago Blackhawks / 330 / 301 / +29

Detroit Red Wings / 329 / 301 / +28

Toronto Maple Leafs / 304 / 281 / +23

Buffalo Sabres / 326 / 306 / +20

New York Rangers / 320 / 300 / +20

L.A. Kings / 339 / 325 / +14

Edmonton Oilers / 328 / 317 / +11

Pittsburgh Penguins / 328 / 318 / +10

Boston Bruins / 281 / 272 / +9

Colorado Avalanche / 297 / 292 / +5

Calgary Flames / 328 / 326 / +2

Montreal Canadiens / 337 / 337 / 0

Ottawa Senators / 304 / 308 / -4

Columbus Blue Jackets / 303 / 308 / -5

Florida Panthers / 281 / 289 / -8

Atlanta Thrashers / 319 / 329 / -10

St. Louis Blues / 317 / 329 / -12

New Jersey Devils / 279 / 295 / -16

Vancouver Canucks / 323 / 344 / -21

Nashville Predators / 289 / 315 / -26

New York Islanders / 292 / 325 / -33

Washington Capitals / 311 / 361 / -50

Tampa Bay Lightning / 312 / 369 / -57

Anaheim Ducks / 289 / 354 / -65

Philadelphia Flyers / 288 / 365 / -84

(Funny how we're at dead center with 0)

And an interesting idea, although from a leaf fan (now don’t boo me!)...

Blue and White Beat: Hold NHL officials accountable by making them available to the media

June 14, 2009

For the everyday working man or woman, the last thing anyone would want to do after making a mistake on the job is to face a horde of hungry media demanding an explanation.

Fortunately, answering a bombardment of questions is not in the job description for most common folk.

Those involved in pro sports, however, understand that addressing the media – under both positive and negative circumstances – is as much as part of the handsomely-paid profession as the on-field, or on-ice action.

NHL players and coaches are held accountable for mistakes in part by virtue of their obligations for media availability following a game.

Why aren’t referees and linesmen held to the same standard?

It’s a shame that on-ice officials aren’t made available to speak to the media following the game. If they were, perhaps some insight would be provided regarding many of the phantom calls and non-calls that were evident throughout the playoffs, especially in the final series.

The seven-game matchup lived up to its showcase billing, with Sidney Crosby, Nicklas Lidstrom and two of the regular-season’s Hart Trophy nominees Evgeni Malkin and Pavel Datsyuk engaging in a showdown for the ages. Thus it’s rather unfortunate that the series featuring the best players did not feature the best officials.

The rest of this article can be found here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The officiating is one of the biggest reasons (but not the only one), that I believe the NHL has drastically gone downhill. I will always and forever be a Canadiens fan, but I can't, and won't, say that I will always and forever watch the Canadiens. I understand that no one is perfect, and people do make mistakes, but really....2 referees, 2 linesmen, 2 many blown/non calls. 4 officials on the ice, and so many things missed/called wrong? No way, shouldn't be. When a player does something blatanly wrong.....A FOOT IN FRONT OF THE OFFICIAL....and nothing is done about it (he doesnt see it)....TIME AND TIME AGAIN....it gets a little ridiculous. It's a joke. Ever since a lot of the older ref's retired, the officiating is pathetic. To me, the ref'ing, (and most of the rule changes), have made the game sickening, and a lot of the time, hard to watch. I think maybe a little more time needs to be given to training the referees/linesmen, and maybe the linesmen should be allowed to do more then they do now. I don't know. One thing I have heard in the past is possibly having officials off the ice (as well as having them on the ice), being able to make calls. I don't think that would be too crazy of an idea. Things would have to be worked out for that to become a reality, but I believe more things would be called correctly. On a side note, as far as the rules, and I know it may seem silly, but I almost prefer the game the way it used to be....even with the clutch and grab, hack and slash style of play. Enough with all the constant rule changes. If things needs to be changed (for one reason or another), ok, that's one thing, but do things need to be changed pretty much every other year?? And some of the changes are just silly. Anyways...I do, honestly, absolutely, think something needs to be done about the brutal officiating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... It’s a shame that on-ice officials aren’t made available to speak to the media following the game. If they were, perhaps some insight would be provided regarding many of the phantom calls and non-calls that were evident throughout the playoffs, especially in the final series. ...

That is a horrible idea.

If you put them in front of the media, you jeopardize their neutrality. The referee's goal should be simple. Ensure neither team is operating outside of parameters and penalize any team that defies those boundaries. Subjecting them to media scrutiny would only serve to further imbalance the system. Be it for glory, aversion to criticism or pride, referees would be enticed into performing for their image and to appease the media, where they should maintain a higher level of anonymity than they do currently.

There are officiating staff to regulate the officials already, and there are people that monitor the regulation of the officiating staff. While fans and media are left with little recourse but to criticize referees currently, when one referee is called into question, it is officiating in general, and not an individual that should face scrutiny.

I feel there are two main problems associated with the current system :

1. Potential infractions are either ignored, or assessed unnecessarily, in favor of "leveling the playing field".

It shouldn't matter how many men a team has in the box or what the current ratio is between the two teams in terms of penalties assessed. If a referee sees something they can justify as an infraction, it should be assessed as one.

That's a large reason for the apparently shifting parameters in the calls. Referees temper their whistle based on the flow of the game. That causes confusion among the players and creates the perception that they can push the limits.

I'm not suggesting that every call that could be a call, should be a call, but the players need to operate under the belief that every potential infraction will be assessed. You can argue that "He barely hooked him", but the point is, he DID hook him. The degree of the hook should not impact the decision to make a call.

2. No human can see everything on the ice. That means things will be missed and it may also mean that what isn't missed, is misinterpreted.

I don't see why referees shouldn't be permitted to avail themselves of instant replay in order to ensure they made the right call. They might think they saw something, in which case, they want to stop play and check. I don't see why not. The referee makes the call as usual, then chooses to review the tape if he isn't confident, (which means none of the other officials saw it either.) We go to break and watch a commercial, or the network runs through some replays and then we come back to the game to see if a penalty has been assessed. It wouldn't happen as often as you might think.

Then there are missed calls. A coach's timeout should also be able to be used as a challenge, where the coach points out an infraction and the referees have to review the play to see if it actually was deserving of a penalty. If the coach is right and a penalty is assessed, the team keeps their right to call a timeout, or challenge for another call. If he is wrong, the team loses the challenge, their timeout and receives a delay of game penalty. That would ensure a challenge is not used frivolously and the referees would likely be thankful to have a second chance at seeing a play and making up for a blown call. This should only be usable on certain types of penalties, illegal equipment already operates in a similar manner, but any play that causes harm to another player should be able to be challenged.

Again, just my opinions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is a horrible idea.

If you put them in front of the media, you jeopardize their neutrality. The referee's goal should be simple. Ensure neither team is operating outside of parameters and penalize any team that defies those boundaries. Subjecting them to media scrutiny would only serve to further imbalance the system. Be it for glory, aversion to criticism or pride, referees would be enticed into performing for their image and to appease the media, where they should maintain a higher level of anonymity than they do currently.

There are officiating staff to regulate the officials already, and there are people that monitor the regulation of the officiating staff. While fans and media are left with little recourse but to criticize referees currently, when one referee is called into question, it is officiating in general, and not an individual that should face scrutiny.

Agreed, we don't want ego or other factors to start impacting their performance.

I feel there are two main problems associated with the current system :

1. Potential infractions are either ignored, or assessed unnecessarily, in favor of "leveling the playing field".

It shouldn't matter how many men a team has in the box or what the current ratio is between the two teams in terms of penalties assessed. If a referee sees something they can justify as an infraction, it should be assessed as one.

That's a large reason for the apparently shifting parameters in the calls. Referees temper their whistle based on the flow of the game. That causes confusion among the players and creates the perception that they can push the limits.

I'm not suggesting that every call that could be a call, should be a call, but the players need to operate under the belief that every potential infraction will be assessed. You can argue that "He barely hooked him", but the point is, he DID hook him. The degree of the hook should not impact the decision to make a call.

Agreed as well, I think a mixture of pressure from the league for tight games and subconsciously not wanting to look biased or whatever makes ref do a little too much controlling

2. No human can see everything on the ice. That means things will be missed and it may also mean that what isn't missed, is misinterpreted.

I don't see why referees shouldn't be permitted to avail themselves of instant replay in order to ensure they made the right call. They might think they saw something, in which case, they want to stop play and check. I don't see why not. The referee makes the call as usual, then chooses to review the tape if he isn't confident, (which means none of the other officials saw it either.) We go to break and watch a commercial, or the network runs through some replays and then we come back to the game to see if a penalty has been assessed. It wouldn't happen as often as you might think.

Then there are missed calls. A coach's timeout should also be able to be used as a challenge, where the coach points out an infraction and the referees have to review the play to see if it actually was deserving of a penalty. If the coach is right and a penalty is assessed, the team keeps their right to call a timeout, or challenge for another call. If he is wrong, the team loses the challenge, their timeout and receives a delay of game penalty. That would ensure a challenge is not used frivolously and the referees would likely be thankful to have a second chance at seeing a play and making up for a blown call. This should only be usable on certain types of penalties, illegal equipment already operates in a similar manner, but any play that causes harm to another player should be able to be challenged.

Again, just my opinions.

This I disagree with. The problem with letting them make the call and review is that you've already given the team a chance to pull their goalie and go for the goal, you've also stopped play once the team gets the puck, possibly preventing a good scoring opportunity. Are we going to dissallow a goal that was scored with the goalie pulled on a "retracted" call? I just feel it would lead to way too many "I'll call it just in case". I think the current system works pretty well: you call it and live with the consequences.

For the same reason, I don't like challenges. While I'm all for challenging goals, this happens automatically in the NHL anyways. It's something people always talk about, but I don't think challenging or allowing reviews on penalties or potential penalties is a good idea. Any system has its flaws, I think the NHLs is relatively decent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This I disagree with. The problem with letting them make the call and review is that you've already given the team a chance to pull their goalie and go for the goal, you've also stopped play once the team gets the puck, possibly preventing a good scoring opportunity. Are we going to dissallow a goal that was scored with the goalie pulled on a "retracted" call? I just feel it would lead to way too many "I'll call it just in case". I think the current system works pretty well: you call it and live with the consequences.

For the same reason, I don't like challenges. While I'm all for challenging goals, this happens automatically in the NHL anyways. It's something people always talk about, but I don't think challenging or allowing reviews on penalties or potential penalties is a good idea. Any system has its flaws, I think the NHLs is relatively decent.

I hadn't anticipated the main factor of the "just in case" calls. That kind of destroys any benefit, as it takes what I expected would be infrequent occurrences and makes them common. I hadn't considered goals being called back correctly either. I have to agree with your disagreement there.

My main reason for suggesting challenges, is plays where a player is getting injured. If a player is coming back to the bench bleeding from a high stick that the referee missed, that's a 4 minute power play that the victimized team misses out on. Even worse is when a high stick is missed against one team, but later called in favor of the other. That leads to one team potentially being at the short end of the stick for 8 minutes, no pun intended.

A side note on the high sticking penalty in general. I disagree with the double minor call. My opinion is that high sticking should be called as a minor, unless it was intentional or due to gross negligence, in which case it could be interpreted as a major. Players have the option of full face protection and they choose not to use it. A single minor is more than sufficient, but if they are going to have double minors associated with it, missed calls are unacceptable, in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

a few commentators here in chicago mentioned that because someone on the blackhawks had hauled off and hit a ref a few years back the entire corps had trended in the direction of making calls on the them for years after. now i believe it, hoping i can make such a statement while staying neutral on the subject of being a fan...

ergo- add in we don't need a bad reputation. if we are sitting at neutral- let's make an effort to gain the advantage, instead of going the other way

A side note on the high sticking penalty in general. I disagree with the double minor call. My opinion is that high sticking should be called as a minor, unless it was intentional or due to gross negligence, in which case it could be interpreted as a major. Players have the option of full face protection and they choose not to use it. A single minor is more than sufficient, but if they are going to have double minors associated with it, missed calls are unacceptable, in my opinion.

true as stated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

What I would definitely want to see in the NHL, where seconds and centimetres can make a difference in the outcome, is the same kind of precision regarding the referee calls and lack of calls.

Just like there are video judges, and head judges from Toronto(!) of all places, there should be someone supervising from above the said referee calls and lack of calls.

Call it the ombudsman if you will, but his job is to pinpoint incompetent and unfair calls and/or lack thereof. I cannot phatom why there isn't already this sort of thing.

Especially now, while the opening game against the Leaves gives us a beautiful exemple of a fixed-looking game. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I would definitely want to see in the NHL, where seconds and centimetres can make a difference in the outcome, is the same kind of precision regarding the referee calls and lack of calls.

Just like there are video judges, and head judges from Toronto(!) of all places, there should be someone supervising from above the said referee calls and lack of calls.

Call it the ombudsman if you will, but his job is to pinpoint incompetent and unfair calls and/or lack thereof. I cannot phatom why there isn't already this sort of thing.

Especially now, while the opening game against the Leaves gives us a beautiful exemple of a fixed-looking game. :rolleyes:

The RDS announcers were even making reference at one point. "Well.... we are in Toronto I suppose. This tends to happen here".

What is the review process, anyway? I assume there's someone who goes over the games with them afterwards. If there isn't, there should be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The RDS announcers were even making reference at one point. "Well.... we are in Toronto I suppose. This tends to happen here".

What is the review process, anyway? I assume there's someone who goes over the games with them afterwards. If there isn't, there should be.

There is no review process. The Leafs whine about the Refs,,,the refs cave and shut their eyes. Its T.O. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well through three games it's becoming apparent to me that the theme for this years NHL is "goon hockey rules". The officials haven't been calling anything this year. Interference, hooking and cross checking has been running rampant. When they finally do decided to call something it's usually a terribly weak call and something that both teams had been getting away with all night up to that point.

Take tonight for example.... Since when can a gooney team like the Flames go an entire game without ONE infraction?

I suspect that this has been Brian Burke mandated, what with all his garbage about being such a rough and tumble team. I just can't believe the league seems to be buying into it. Shameful really. What happened to "the new NHL"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So refs cant win. They make too many calls, people complain. They dont make enough, more complaints. We are talking about humans. They make mistakes. If something is blatant, thats one thing. But if they miss something that occurred either while they were watching another aspect of the game or just blinked and missed it, its a case of 'What can you do?'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well through three games it's becoming apparent to me that the theme for this years NHL is "goon hockey rules". The officials haven't been calling anything this year. Interference, hooking and cross checking has been running rampant. When they finally do decided to call something it's usually a terribly weak call and something that both teams had been getting away with all night up to that point.

Take tonight for example.... Since when can a gooney team like the Flames go an entire game without ONE infraction?

I suspect that this has been Brian Burke mandated, what with all his garbage about being such a rough and tumble team. I just can't believe the league seems to be buying into it. Shameful really. What happened to "the new NHL"?

The new NHL is now old and gone like the wind. I agree about last night's game too there were several infractions that should have been called against the Flames. I don't know if its home team bias or general incompetence but the referring has been noticeably bad. Bettman better wake up and you know.... actually do something about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So refs cant win. They make too many calls, people complain. They dont make enough, more complaints. We are talking about humans. They make mistakes. If something is blatant, thats one thing. But if they miss something that occurred either while they were watching another aspect of the game or just blinked and missed it, its a case of 'What can you do?'.

Well look, my father is a ref (not in the NHL but still) and

like surgeons, pharmaceutical lab technicians and lion tamers...

NO, they're not supposed to be "just humans".

And they're being paid accordingly.

That is why I suggest someone "up there" to supervise the refs work in direct time, and correct stupid calls, like the early whistle against Calgary last night. We should have gotten a penalty shot or something. :angry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well look, my father is a ref (not in the NHL but still) and

like surgeons, pharmaceutical lab technicians and lion tamers...

NO, they're not supposed to be "just humans".

And they're being paid accordingly.

That is why I suggest someone "up there" to supervise the refs work in direct time, and correct stupid calls, like the early whistle against Calgary last night. We should have gotten a penalty shot or something. :angry:

While I wouldnt put them in the same level as a surgeon or other medical professional, they shouldnt miss much. But how many calls against montreal or any team arent always called? Whether its a game breaker or not? They are human and they do make mistakes or just cant see every little thing the same way 20000 people with an unobstructed view of everything can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The new NHL is now old and gone like the wind. I agree about last night's game too there were several infractions that should have been called against the Flames. I don't know if its home team bias or general incompetence but the referring has been noticeably bad. Bettman better wake up and you know.... actually do something about it.

+1000000

I could have called atleast 3 penalties against the Flames easily and maybe even a questionable game misconduct and 5 minute major. And it's not just because I'm a habs fan...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I wouldnt put them in the same level as a surgeon or other medical professional, they shouldnt miss much. But how many calls against montreal or any team arent always called? Whether its a game breaker or not? They are human and they do make mistakes or just cant see every little thing the same way 20000 people with an unobstructed view of everything can.

Which is why I say there should be someone, akin to the video judge, who has a direct phone line with the refs on the ice, to correct blatantly missed calls and bad judgements. I stand my point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So refs cant win. They make too many calls, people complain. They dont make enough, more complaints. We are talking about humans. They make mistakes. If something is blatant, thats one thing. But if they miss something that occurred either while they were watching another aspect of the game or just blinked and missed it, its a case of 'What can you do?'.

Your right however,,,,,thats the problem in a nut shell. There is NO consistency from game to game. One set of Refs calls nothing one game and a different set of Refs call you for everything but jaywalking the next. It almost looks like these guys never meet to discuss what is and isnt an infraction. That crew in Calgary last night decided to take a day off IMO and their linesman were absolutely brutal in that game with both the missed and fanthom offsides. Very bushleague.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your right however,,,,,thats the problem in a nut shell. There is NO consistency from game to game. One set of Refs calls nothing one game and a different set of Refs call you for everything but jaywalking the next. It almost looks like these guys never meet to discuss what is and isnt an infraction. That crew in Calgary last night decided to take a day off IMO and their linesman were absolutely brutal in that game with both the missed and fanthom offsides. Very bushleague.

The issue is same in baseball for a strike zone, one guys will call a pitch two inches outside and the other guy won't call it even if its on the black.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
So refs cant win. They make too many calls, people complain. They dont make enough, more complaints. We are talking about humans. They make mistakes. If something is blatant, thats one thing. But if they miss something that occurred either while they were watching another aspect of the game or just blinked and missed it, its a case of 'What can you do?'.

Many a time it is without human error. Take for instance that Carolina game last year when the Habs visited. That, in my 40 + years of watching the sport, has to be the most blatant idiotic officiating I have EVER seen, but for just one instance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread isn't working very well, after the Colorado game only one person complains about that little 2 man advantage; and none have even mentioned Plekanek's goal that never should have happened since the puck hit the mesh. If the purpose of the thread was to hold the refs accountable, we aren't doing a very good job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread isn't working very well, after the Colorado game only one person complains about that little 2 man advantage; and none have even mentioned Plekanek's goal that never should have happened since the puck hit the mesh. If the purpose of the thread was to hold the refs accountable, we aren't doing a very good job.

i think the same thing happened in the the islanders-sen game a week before, so i guess they figured..."well we let that go, we might as well never call it" lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...